Re: [rmcat] Priority and rtcweb

[Varun Singh <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, I'll check it out. Since I didn’t remotely participate in the
meeting today, Was there any input from the room?
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 at 23.37, Ingemar Johansson S <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi
>
>
>
> SCReAM supports a float priority value, in reality though I doubt that
> there is much benefit to have a higher granularity than the given values as
> we deal with live encoding with video coders that often produce a messy
> output. In the presentation today you’ll see an example of prioritization
> in the wild (page 12 in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/slides-100-rmcat-scream-experiments/
> )
>
>
>
> /Ingemar
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Varun Singh [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* den 14 november 2017 04:51
> *To:* Michael Welzl <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Zaheduzzaman Sarker <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]; Colin Perkins <[e-mail]>; W3C@CSIO <
> [e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [rmcat] Priority and rtcweb
>
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Michael Welzl <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> Can I hijack this thread to talk about priority?
>
>
>
>
>
> Priority is already defined in the API document to the following levels:
> high, medium, low, very-low.
>
> These labels map to the text in the transport document
>
>
>
>         Thus, when congestion occurs, a "high" priority flow will have the
>
>         ability to send 8 times as much data as a "very-low" priority flow
> if
>
>         both have data to send. This prioritization is independent of the
>
>         media type. The details of which packet to send first are
>
>         implementation defined.
>
>
>
> WEBRTC API:
> https://rawgit.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/master/webrtc.html#dom-rtcprioritytype
>
>
>
>
>
> There was a thread about priority in rtcweb - someone asking for a float…
> coupled-cc can easily support a float, but Harald’s transport draft doesn’t
> support it. Opinions went back and forth for a bit...
>
> I think we should get more WebRTC deployment and not more debate on small
> details that delays the work, so I don’t want to be a troublemaker and
> didn’t interfere with this discussion.
>
> But, what is the view of people in rmcat about this?
>
>
>
>
>
> While the API does not provide a float value, nonetheless, doesn't the
> WebRTC stack or framework under the JS API have all the information to
> convert the set labels in to a float values after the flows are assigned
> values?
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Varun Singh <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Was there a study done for the parameters needed for congestion control? I
> know we debated this at length, were there slides created by  the
> congestion control proponents, that I can reference.
>
>
>
> From the top of my head, I remember there’s
>
> + priority (needed by coupled congestion control)
>
>
>
> I’m asking this for w3c input. They already have max bitrate, max
> framearte, and degradation preference  degradation preference indicates
> where the bits should be allocated: in maintaining frame rates or frame
> sizes.
>
>
>
> Feedback is appreciated To make sure we didn’t miss anything.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Varun.
>
> --
>
> Founder, CEO, callstats.io
>
> http://www.callstats.io
>
>
>
> Interested in networking, media quality, and diagnostics.
>
> We are hiring!: www.callstats.io/jobs/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Founder, CEO, callstats.io
> http://www.callstats.io
>
> Interested in networking, media quality, and diagnostics.
> We are hiring!: www.callstats.io/jobs/
>
-- 
Founder, CEO, callstats.io
http://www.callstats.io

Interested in networking, media quality, and diagnostics.
We are hiring!: www.callstats.io/jobs/